05.10.2026 –, Room 1 Sprache: English
Citizen scientists form a growing and increasingly visible group of actors in contemporary knowledge production (Mazumdar et al., 2018; Pocock et al., 2017). This is reflected both in the expansion of projects, platforms, and institutions operating under the label of citizen science, as well as in its increasing recognition as a distinct and legitimate mode of knowledge production rather than a marginal extension of conventional science (Berti Suman and Alblas, 2023; Eitzel et al., 2017). At the same time, the relationship between science and society has become complex; scientific work is increasingly conducted ‘in public,’ making processes of uncertainty, disagreement, and revision visible to wider audiences, while many science-related issues are closely intertwined with values, identities, and political debates (Degeling et al., 2025; Rekker, 2021). Moreover, science is deeply embedded in governance and everyday life, shaping how problems are defined and which responses are considered legitimate (Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1994; Turnhout et al., 2020). As a result, debates about science involve both questions of evidence and how knowledge is produced, evaluated, and used (Jasanoff, 2011; Ottinger, 2010). Although this context is sometimes described in terms of a post-truth era (Berti Suman & Alblas, 2023, Davies and Mah, 2020), overall trust in science remains relatively high, albeit increasingly uneven across groups and issues (Cologna et al., 2022; Rutjens et al., 2018).
Against this backdrop, citizen science is frequently associated with the promise of strengthening trust in science and science-society relations through participation (Bedessem et al., 2023; Hessels & Brouwer, 2019). However, in contexts where science is closely intertwined with policy debates and local conflicts, such as in environmental policy-relevant science, the relationship between participation and trust remains complex and contested (Wynne, 2006). Moreover, trust in science is not a singular or uniform construct, but varies across domains and dimensions and is shaped by individuals’ worldviews and social contexts (Hendriks et al., 2016; Lewandowsky et al., 2013; Rutjens & Hornsey, 2025).
To address these complexities and advance empirical understanding of how citizen scientists relate to science, this paper presents findings from a mixed-method PhD project examining how participation in environmental citizen science in the Netherlands relates to socially robust knowledge, psychological distance to science and trust in science. The project integrates three qualitative case studies of citizen sensing initiatives in contested local contexts (e.g., air quality, noise, and environmental exposure) with two quantitative studies: a survey comparing citizens with and without citizen science experience (N = 763), and a focused analysis within this sample examining environmental citizen science participants’ perspectives on (citizen) science and different forms of (dis)trust (N = 450). Conceptually, the study combines the STS framework of socially robust knowledge (Nowotny, 2003) with the social psychological concept of psychological distance to science (Većkalov et al., 2024). This approach enables an analysis of how participatory practices shape both knowledge production and citizens’ experiential relationship to science.
Across studies, findings show that participation in citizen science reduces psychological distance to science by making research processes more tangible, locally embedded, and socially accessible. This experiential proximity is closely linked to trust in specific projects, methods, and actors. At the same time, participation does not automatically translate into higher generalized trust in science. Instead, trust emerges as relational and context-dependent, shaped by transparency, perceived fairness, opportunities for meaningful involvement, and the extent to which citizen-generated knowledge is recognized within scientific and policy contexts, echoing previous research (Ottinger, 2010; Berti Suman & Alblas, 2023). Furthermore, even in politically salient and conflict-driven projects, citizen scientists do not position themselves in opposition to science. Rather, they tend to value scientific expertise while seeking to complement it with local, experiential knowledge. Citizen science thus produces knowledge that is both scientifically credible and socially meaningful, while reshaping relationships between citizens, scientists, and institutions. These results suggest that trust in (citizen) science should be understood as both a possible outcome of participation, as well as an enabling condition and a dynamic that can be strengthened or undermined over time. In sum, this research project contributes empirical insights into how participatory practices can shape trust in science in real-world contexts, and highlights the importance of institutional responsiveness in realizing the potential of citizen science.
Kirsten Vegt is a PhD candidate at Leiden University and the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) in the Netherlands. Her research explores the intersection of psychological distance to and trust in science, and the social robustness of policy-relevant environmental science through citizen engagement.
Rathenau Instituut & Leiden University